[2010-02-24 08:08] Anselm R Garbe <ans...@garbe.us> > > someone pointed me to this: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dwm#Dwm > > I wouldn't recommend to join that discussion there, such appeals > usually lead to the deletion.
That does not surprise me, when you read the arguments why to keep the page. They just do not give relevant points. ``dwm is cool'' ist simply nothing more than a personal opinion. Seems most people in the discussion think it would be a poll. > But perhaps someone has more links to second party sources that > might convince them to keep the article. Unfortunately, I haven't done a talk about dwm itself which I could provide. I think the articles you mentioned are important in the debatte. At least in uzbl's case articles and talks were important. Haven't you done an interview too? >From my POV, the most important thing about dwm is that it was dwm that made tiling WMs interestingly modern. Of course there were ion and larswm and wmi(i), but dwm pushed the concept to the ``masses''. Altough dwm itself is not the most used tiling WM, it is the father of almost all modern tiling WMs. It had and has a huge influence on the market of tiling WMs. And *this* is the point why dwm should have the Wikipedia page. Maybe one should list all WMs that see dwm as their primary influence. meillo
